The twentieth century has witnessed the emergence of the brass
chamber ensemble as a colourful mode of expression distinct from
the psuedo-string quartet and woodwind quintet textures of the
eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. With this emergence, there
has evolved an interest in the brass chamber ensemble as a vehicle
for student performers, a vehicle permitting active and meaningful
involvement with the materials of music on a personal level.

Locating well-crafted, idiomatic and expressive works suitable
for student brass performers is a time-consuming and arduous task,
the difficulty of which is further compounded by the demands in
recent years for increased Canadian content in music education.
The John Adaskin Project (Canadian Music for Schools) has already
done much to promote the development of a large and varied repertoire
for student bands, orchestras, and choirs. This Guidelist represents
a preliminary effort to develop a similar Canadian repertoire
for heterogeneous brass trios, quartets, and quintets.

Detailed annotations describing level of difficulty, technical,
musical, and ensemble challenges, and potential pedagogical value
aim to familiarize music educators with the repertoire currently
available, and to ensure that they have adequate information with
which to make informed repertoire selections. This information
should also prove useful to composers and publishers interested
in writing and publishing music for student performers. There
is a serious lack of fine Canadian brass chamber music for elementary
and junior student ensembles, and it is hoped that composers and
publishers will work together to fill this gap.

While every attempt has been made to achieve objectivity and
consistency during the preparation of the Guidelist, the choice
of repertoire ultimately involves individual taste. Repertoire
selection is one of the music educator's most important responsibilities.
The teacher owes it to his students to choose the best possible
repertoire, weighing all the various musical and educational factors
related to the specific situation. A composition should not be
selected merely because it is Canadian. If it is worthy of study,
it must have a musical integrity that moves beyond all consideration
of nationality. The Guidelist reveals that Canadian composers
have written musically worthy brass chamber compositions for student
performers. Consequently, brass chamber experiences using Canadian
music have the potential to enhance students' awareness of their
own cultural heritage, and to develop their musical sensitivity.
This is an exciting prospect to which it is hoped the Guidelist
has made a valuable contribution.

I would like to express my deep appreciation to all the music
educators, composers, performers, and students from across Canada
who made this endeavour possible. I am especially indebted to
those who devoted many hours to the development of Guidelines
for the Assessment of Difficulty, and to those who read and graciously
criticized draft versions of the Guidelist, specifically Dr. Wayne
Bowman, Mr. Alan Ehnes, Dr. Kenneth Nichols, Mr. Ron Parker, Mr.
Larry Allen, Mr. John Dowden, Mr. Darryl Eaton, Mr. Scot Irving,
and Mr. Peter Stubley.

Heart-felt gratitude is similarly extended to Dr. Patricia
Shand, Director of the John Adaskin Project. She has been a continuing
source of inspiration and support.

Funding was generously provided by Don Wright and by the Canadian
Music Educators' Association. The Canadian Music Centre was generous
with its scores and recordings. Gail Richardson's programming
expertise facilitated the preparation of the final copy, and Jill
Dawson provided welcome assistance.

Lastly, I would like to thank my family, by way of a loving
dedication, for their patience, understanding, and support.

Eleanor Victoria Stubley

Research Associate,

John Adaskin Project

Explanatory Notes

The Guidelist is limited to original unpublished compositions
for heterogeneous brass trio, quartet, and quintet written by
Canadian composers before December 1985. Ensemble instrumentations
are further limited to include only the following: trumpet, horn,
and trombone; two trumpets and trombone; horn, trombone, and tuba;
trumpet, horn, trombone, and tuba; two trumpets (two fluegelhorns),
horn, and trombone; and two trumpets, horn, trombone, and tuba
(bass trombone). Music has been written for other heterogeneous
and homogeneous ensembles, but these works were beyond the scope
of this study. Compositions requiring an additional percussionist
or supplementary percussion instruments to be played by the ensemble
are included. Transcriptions and simplified arrangements are not
considered.

The adjectives Easy, Medium, and Difficult are used to describe
level of difficulty.

Easy compositions are suitable for brass players who have had
fewer than two years of instruction.

Medium compositions are suitable for brass players who have
had two to three years of instruction.

Difficult compositions are demanding for average high school
performers who have had three or more years of instruction.

A line graph indicates relative difficulty within each category,
and where there is the possibility of performance at an easier
level of difficulty, compositions are cross-referenced.

Difficulty was assessed in terms of each composition's technical,
musical, and ensemble challenges, with the global difficulty rating
usually reflecting an equal weighting of the three categories.
Where the difficulty of such challenges differed substantially,
the global rating favours the most difficult of the three categories.
But since each composition is an individual creation in which
technical, musical, and ensemble challenges (artitifical distinctions
even at the best of times) are intricately and uniquely combined,
the determination of an overall level of difrlculty ultimately
involved a fair degree of subjective judgement. Therefore, the
global rating is not a definitive assessment of difficulty and
should not be ccnsidered in isolation from the annotations describing
the specific challenges, or from the capabilities of the specific
ensemble for which music is being selected.

Guidelines for assessing technical challenges were derived
from a survey of Canadian university brass instructors. Guidelines
for assessing musical challenges were modeled after similar guidelines
in use by the John Adaskin Project. Guidelines for assessing ensemble
challenges followed from an analysis of previously graded published
brass chamber works. Five criteria focusing on quality of craftmanship,
expressivity, and suitability for student performers were used
to rate potential pedagogical value. The Guidelines for Assessment
of Difficulty are available through the John Adaskin Project.

Compositions are arranged alphabetically by composer according
to level of difficulty. Easy compositions are described on pp.
1-6, Medium compositions on pp. 7-30, and Difficult compositions
on pp. 31-32. Bibliographical information for each entry includes
exact instrumentation, availability of scores and parts, approximate
duration, and where possible, date of composition. Where a composition
is available only through the composer, interested persons should
contact the John Adaskin Project.

Ranges

Where ranges of instruments are specified, the following system
is used to identify written pitches: